Comments on One person’s reductio: Marriage Equality editionofficial state media for a secessionist republic of one2016-11-16T22:26:32Zhttp://radgeek.com/gt/2014/06/29/one-persons-reductio-marriage-equality-edition/feed/WordPressBy: John T. KennedyJohn T. Kennedyhttp://radgeek.com/?p=7595#comment-2408472014-07-06T18:05:34Z2014-07-06T18:05:34ZSo what does it mean to advocate legalizing it?
]]>By: John T. KennedyJohn T. Kennedyhttp://radgeek.com/?p=7595#comment-2408462014-07-06T18:04:39Z2014-07-06T18:04:39ZAs far as I can tell Polygamy has been legalized in all 50 states as of the Kody Brown family decision last December. I don’t think anyone can currently be prosecuted for polygamy.
]]>By: Francois TremblayFrancois Tremblayhttp://francoistremblay.wordpress.com/http://radgeek.com/?p=7595#comment-2382472014-07-02T00:37:29Z2014-07-02T00:37:29ZWhoa there. I agree with you that marriage licenses are unjustified and should be abolished, but that doesn’t mean women in polygamous marriages aren’t being oppressed. For that matter, women in monogamous marriages. All marriage is inherently dysfunctional.
]]>By: Roderick T. LongRoderick T. Longhttp://aaeblog.comhttp://radgeek.com/?p=7595#comment-2372212014-06-29T19:33:01Z2014-06-29T19:33:01ZOn these issues see also Elizabeth Brake’s book Minimizing Marriage:

If anything they are often scrutinized in ways that tend to be exoticizing, to significantly romanticize “normal,” monogamous marriages and conventional childcare arrangements, and to ignore the extent to which those are also embedded within & shaped by patriarchy. In general it seems like the salient issue is probably not really the number of men and women in the relationship but rather something else, which needs to be addressed in ways other than the ways that mainstream anti-polygamy discourse tends to play out.

Of course not. But it would affect specific women’s lives for the better, by removing the legal stigma that they currently live under. That’s worthwhile and important.

I honestly don’t see how the stigma surrounding non-monogamous relationships will be ended until the necessity for the nuclear family unit is ended. The Family is arguably one of the most powerful ideological apparatuses: it fosters children into certain modes of thinking and certain societal roles, which will be apparent when those children enter the marketplace to work and produce/serve. And I fail to see how the solution to this is a free market with completely open competition made up entirely of small-scale producers and coops; the Family is profoundly based in relations of production, and if capitalist-like property and exchange relations remain, I don’t see how a paradigm or cultural shift will occur. We can propose alternative relationship models all day, but what is the use if there is little to no incentive for society to desire them?

And to be frank, most of the polyamory I’ve encountered actually does tend to reflect cultural attitudes towards property and consumerism. I mentioned it on my blog post at the end, but most poly does seem to be more about “having more lovers” than about the act of loving itself.

how issues of patriarchy and imbalance of power between males and females are often overlooked or implied that a non-monogamous relationship with inevitably do away with such imbalances

I agree that this is a significant issue in the sexual-liberationist polyamorous community. I’ve heard many poly folks talk about this and raise critiques based on precisely this point. But it would be nice to see if more widely acknowledged.

I don’t think it’s true of people who practice religiously-based polygamy (for example, among Muslims and fundamentalist LDS churches). If anything, the issues of patriarchy and power imbalances tend to be on the surface and hyper-scrutinized by the outside society in these cases, and nobody presumes that the relationships are automatically non-patriarchal. If anything they are often scrutinized in ways that tend to be exoticizing, to significantly romanticize normal, monogamous marriages and conventional childcare arrangements, and to ignore the extent to which those are also embedded within & shaped by patriarchy. In general it seems like the salient issue is probably not really the number of men and women in the relationship but rather something else, which needs to be addressed in ways other than the ways that mainstream anti-polygamy discourse tends to play out.

If polygamy were legalized tomorrow, would it entail that the patriarchal elements of marriage would instantly go away? I doubt it.

Of course not. But it would affect specific women’s lives for the better, by removing the legal stigma that they currently live under. That’s worthwhile and important.

]]>By: JuliaJuliahttp://propagandalalaland.blogspot.com/http://radgeek.com/?p=7595#comment-2370542014-06-29T09:49:23Z2014-06-29T09:49:23ZThe only problem I generally see with advocacy of multi-person relationships (be in polygamy, polyamory, etc.) is how issues of patriarchy and imbalance of power between males and females are often overlooked or implied that a non-monogamous relationship with inevitably do away with such imbalances. Every time I see a polyamorous relationship, for example, it’s almost always one male with multiple girlfriends; it’s not like poly relationships consisting of three FAAB lesbians are the norm.

This piece, written by a friend of mine which I later reblogged, sums it up nicely:

So, in other words, I wish this discussion would be far less about what the government does and much more about cultural issues surrounding patriarchal ideology. If polygamy were legalized tomorrow, would it entail that the patriarchal elements of marriage would instantly go away? I doubt it.